Disney to locate A Wrinkle In Time

[Black Narcissus]

Yeah there is this weird thing of fans of certain directors demanding that they get directing gigs on properties they have no interest in.

People keep saying Bigelow should direct a female superhero movie despite the fact Bigelow has said she isn't interested in making those kinds of movies currently.

 

[samsnee]

This was a C- or a D.

It was just boring until the last half hour. I was expecting an exciting adventure and it was a drag. The Mrs were horribly miscast. Oprah just felt like Oprah in Flash Gordon outfits. Her dialogue was just heavy handed.

As for the lead, she just wasn’t engaging. I know she was supposed to be that way because of her father disappearing but it’s hard to cheer for a character that is such a put off. The point was she was supposed to accept her faults which make her strong, but it just didn’t work.

And Charles Wallace takes the crown for most annoying kid actor since the blonde kid from Jurassic Park.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

She said on Reel Time with Bill Maher awhile back that she had no interest in directing a superhero movie because "they were not substantial enough for her". She wants to direct the Hurt Locker and Zero Dark Thirty type movies not the big summer tentpole blockbusters.

 

[jmc]

Bigelow has had no interest in big budgeted movies, she's been clear about it.

 

[batman1]

Being a black woman director, I'll be transparent. She really needed for this to be a hit, if she wants to do more big budget ****. But she may be fine doing more quiet indie dramas or whatever.

I agree. This movie will be a financial and critical fail. She isn't the next big director. She is talented but not on Coogler's level.

 

[blackdragon6]

TBH the thug notes summary of the book pretty much put me off from the story. When i saw the summary i was like WTF lol after that i had NO interest in seeing that movie. Although i feel like had it been made in the 80's it would be a cult classic now like The Never Ending Story, Return to Oz, or Labyrinth.

 

[blackdragon6]

She isn't the next big director. She is talented but not on Coogler's level.

Eh, i totally disagree with that.

 

[HBarnill]

It didn’t do too badly at the BO. It’s opened much higher than the other Disney live action flops and the budget wasn’t nearly as big as theirs. WOM seems to be good from its targeted demo so this has a potential to have a Greatest Showman-style run

 

[Zant]

It didn’t do too badly at the BO. It’s opened much higher than the other Disney live action flops and the budget wasn’t nearly as big as theirs. WOM seems to be good from its targeted demo so this has a potential to have a Greatest Showman-style run

Not many films have The Greatest Showman-style box office run. Not even close.
The international market numbers is where they should worry.

 

[batman1]

Eh, i totally disagree with that.

The fans overall, the critics, and the box office decide this. Not me or any random opinion. She is failing in all categories. Potential doesn't make success. It's not personal. Nobody is attacking her. It's just true.

 

[fancyarcher]

My review of A Wrinkle in Time.

https://dailyuv.com/profile/2232/946721

 

[scarlet-witch]

As much as I love Ava, I really don't think she directed the children well. Charles wallace especially was awful.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

The fans overall, the critics, and the box office decide this. Not me or any random opinion. She is failing in all categories. Potential doesn't make success. It's not personal. Nobody is attacking her. It's just true.

Art is not math.

 

[HBarnill]

As much as I love Ava, I really don't think she directed the children well. Charles wallace especially was awful.

I agree.

 

[scarlet-witch]

Meg was directed perfectly. The others, they’re just not that great to begin with. Wasn’t that Calvin kid Peter Pan in that godawful Hugh Jackman film? Explains a lot. Regardless, they’re all still better than Reese Witherspoon was. Remind me why she has an Oscar but Amy Adams doesn’t?

I didn't think that kid was that bad in Pan, but I felt like the only direction he was given was "look obsessed." He was lovesick with Meg the entire movie. He really didn't show any other emotion besides that. The kid playing CW was almost at Ty Simpkins level of bad. Meg was the best out of the three, I felt like she was holding back in a lot of scenes.

 

[Mysteryman]

Probably going to skip this.
I don't need to watch bad performances by child actors.

 

[DrCosmic]

Like I said in the other thread, the two things I find missing from this conversation are:

1) The story is supposedly unfilmable. Comparing DuVernay's ability to stick the landing on this film evenly with other directors and other films is like comparing a quintuple axel to a triple axel, and deciding the person who falters on the thought-to-be-entirely-impossible move lacks something people doing normal stuff has. It is the epitome of haterdom to see someone attempt the impossible and then respond with "See, I knew she wasn't all that."

2) The movie is targeted at little girls, like... aggressively so. This is not a thing that happens, that a live action movie would be almost intentionally off putting to the otherwise all encompassing market of 18-34 year old males. To rate it without taking that into account is almost as presumptuous as going to a French film and complaining the dialogue didn't appeal to you. Which people do when they're not used to the idea of films that aren't for them in that way.

This is not to say that this is the greatest movie in the world, but it's being evaluated as though the first impressions of a bunch of adult males are reflective of the talents/potential of the director making a film for little girls, and that's pretty ignorant, all things considered.

I won't belabor the point, but a particular rotten review I read said it very well.

But there is an important distinction between the pejorative “kids movie,” and “a movie made for kids.” A Wrinkle in Time feels very “young” to me, and I mean that as a compliment; it was, on its own terms, definitely made to speak to kids. And, to my delight, the film never condescendingly slips into the cynicism and pandering that afflicts so much kid-geared cinema these days. I’m a big fan of films like Hook, Time Bandits, and Return to Oz that wear their ambition and weirdness on their sleeve. Filmmakers who don’t play it safe deserve our respect (especially when they’re making films for kids), and Wrinkle in Time should certainly be praised for taking well-intentioned chances and being strange as all hell. For that, even the battering-ram emotional exposition can be forgiven.
When I think about the history of emerging director big-budget critical stumbles, I hope that DuVernay will emerge as employable and intact as her male peers. Because for all its clumsiness, the mere miracle that Wrinkle in Time exists should never be forgotten.
https://filmschoolrejects.com/a-wrinkle-in-time-review/

 

[Spider-Fan]

Saw it today. It was okay.